My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2001 08 14
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2001 Planning Commission Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2001 08 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:14 AM
Creation date
9/5/2014 2:27:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2001 08 14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Members of the Public: None. <br /> <br />Staff Summary and Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval with seven (7) conditions. <br /> <br />Commission Questions: <br /> <br />Lipton asked the length of time that a car would stay in the automatic bay, as well as the self-serve bay. <br /> <br />Raymond replied that the longest would be 5 ½ minutes with an average of 4 minutes. The self-serve <br />bays average 7-9 minutes per car. <br /> <br />McDermott asked if the drawing provided is correct. <br /> <br />Johnstone replied that the drawing is not correct. <br /> <br />McDermott expressed concern of the vehicle stacking that could occur. He views the stacking as a <br />problem already and only sees it getting worse with the addition of the automatic bay. He also <br />expressed concern with the traffic pattern and where people are going to park to dry their cars before <br />leaving the site. <br /> <br />Lipton asked if a stacking and/or traffic circulation plan had been submitted. <br /> <br />Johnstone replied that the stacking and/or traffic circulation plan had not been provided by the <br />applicant. <br /> <br />Lipton does not want to approve the project until he sees that information. He also wants to have a <br />copy of the adjacent property circulation and how that property will be affected. He requested colored <br />renderings. <br /> <br />Public Hearing Closed Commission Comments: Lipton closed the Public Hearing and asked for <br />Commission Comments. <br /> <br />McAvinew stated that he is uncomfortable because he does not have good plans and the <br />stacking/traffic flow is a concern. <br /> <br />McDermott stated that he has used the facility and with the addition of the automatic wash bay the <br />company is going after a new market which can only make the traffic worse. He needs to have more <br />accurate and complete information. <br /> <br />Lipton stated that the submittal as presented is deficient. He would like to see them come back with <br />better plans, colored renderings, curb cut information, stacking/traffic plan that shows scaled cars. <br /> <br />Pritchard stated that he also uses the facility and he spends about 10 minutes, which makes him wonder <br />about the queue. He does not like the present design of the traffic flow. He does not support this <br />proposal as presented. <br /> <br />Lipton moved to continue the hearing to September 11, 2001 and the applicant is to bring back to the <br />Planning Commission the traffic pattern, colored renderings and accurate plans that reflect all the <br />changes. Seconded by McAvinew. <br />8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.